NEWS OF THE WEEK.
THE Tories have been utterly defeated on the great question of Irish Church Reform. The debate on Lord JOHN RUSSELL s motion commenced on Monday, was continued during the three succeeding nights, and did not terminate till yesterday morning; when the numbers on a division were declared to be 322 for the motion, and 2.89 against it—thus giving a majority of 33 against the Ministers.
The course of proceeding adopted by Lord JOIIN RUSSELL was such as to prevent any misconception of his intentions, and to deprive the Waverers and deserters of all excuse for shuffling. He proposed that the House should go into Committee on the Irish Church Temporalities, with the view to the adoption of a resolu- tion that, after providing for the spiritual wants of the Protes- tant Episcopalians, the surplus of Irish Church revevnue should be applied to the general education of all classes of Christians. That resolution being adopted, the next step would be an address to the King, praying that the Government should take the mea- sures necessary to carry it into effect. This was the plan chalked out by Lord JOHN RUSSELL. Ministers opposed it in its first stage,—namely, the motion to go into Committee; and the re- sult, as we have stated, was their total discomfiture, after making every possible exertion in and out of the House to gain a majo- rity on this vital question. The value of this victory may be easily computed. It is an assurance to the people of Ireland, that the power and influence of the British Government shall no longer be employed to maintain a sinecure Church Establishment in their country. It is an assu- rance that the money collected in the shape of tithes from the Catholic population shall be in part expended for the benefit of those who contribute it, whatever their religious creed may be; thus breaking down the invidious barrier between the mass of the nation and the favoured sect. It is, comparatively, unimportant what the amount of the superfluity of the Irish Church Establish- ment may be reckoned at in pounds, shillings, and pence. "The surplus," as Mr. O'CONNELL said, "may be small, but the prin- ciple is great." The vote of the House of Commons is an earnest of good-will to the Irish nation, an admission of the itnpolicy and injustice of the mode in which it has hitherto been governed, and a promise to pursue a wiser and more Christian-like system. The purpose to which it is proposed to apply the surplus, is well selected—calculated to effect the greatest good, and give the least offence. The most likely method of eradicating the bad feeling now existent between the Catholic and Protestant peasant, is to educate the rising generation of both religions together, and to place them as much as possible on the same footing. Aslong as sinecure churches are kept up, there must be mutual animosity. But when the Catholic sees the produce of the tithes employed in .maintaining a schoolmaster, instead of furnishing luxuries for a parson without a congregation, he will perceive that he is not treated with injustice, and his sense of wrong will give way to kindly feelings. On the other band, it is consistent with human nature to believe, that the Protestant, when freed from the secret consciousness that he profits unfairly by the labour of the Catholic, and that lie is in fact his oppressor, will no longer view his victim with jealousy and fear. It is vain to expect that the prejudices of the present generation will be all at once eradicated; but there is nothing in the character of the Irish which forbids us to hope that many years will not elapse, Mules a better order of things, before all classes and sects among them will be content to live to- gether like men of other countries, in oved fellowship and peace. It bodes well for this result that the Catholics are averse to the establishment of their own religion on the ruins of the Protestant Church. There is no fear of such a project being seriously at- tempted; as, whatever some of the clergy might desire, the Catho- lic laity are decidedly in favour of the Voluntary system. The spirit by which the Catholic leaders are actuated is apparently, of the best kind. Mr. Creorilint. fully agreed with Mr. BuvroN)
that both the religions should have fair play, and that no sincere Catholic or Protestant could consistently object to enlighten and. inform the minds of the people.
It is not only as holding out an olive branch to Ireland, that this decision is valuable and important. It is a recognition of the great principle that the State possesses the right to appropriate the Church revenues to other than Ecclesiastical purposes. It. has demolished in this country the doctrine of the inalienabi- lity of Church possessions—a doctrine which Sir JOHN CAMPBELL.. declared to be opposed to Statute Law and Common Law, and a. remnant of ancient superstition. It is upon this absurd dogma. that the enemies of improvement and the gainers by corruption. have rested their opposition to Ecclesiastical Reform in England as well as Ireland: but the House of Commons has discarded it; and at the same time has given warning to all future Govern- ments, that the true end of Church Establishments is the spiritual improvement of the People, and not the support of any political party, or aggrandizement of any privileged class. The effect of the vote of the House on the existence of the Mi- nistry, is, or ought to be, decisive. It was correctly stated by Mr. Sergeant WILDE to be a question of confidence or no confidence in the Government. Ministers profess to be Reformers of all abuses. Do they allow that the Sinecure Church of Ireland is an abuse? They do not. Then it is impossible that the Country or the House can place confidence in their professions of attachment to Reform. This argument was well worked out by Mr. WILDE, and was un- answerable. In point of fact, then, Ministers have obtained what they have pretended to desire so fervently—an opportunity of fairly ascertaining whether a majority of the People's Representa- tives, in a Parliament summoned by themselves, and on the for- mation of which they had exercised all the ordinary official in- fluence, placed confidence in their declarations of readiness te conduct the Government on the principles of the Reform Bill. They have been tried in reference to the greatest of all existing abuses ; the alternative presented to them was of the mildest and most unexceptionable description ; but they resolved to cling to the abuse, and reject the remedy. It may be safely asserted that the Ministers who oppose Irish Church Reform, will relinquish no abuse, however glaring, provided it be profitable. They will pass Marriage Bills for the Dissenters, with clauses securing emolument to the Clergy, because nothing in the shape of corrupt influence or money is lost thereby, and a little popularity may be gained; but the means of providing fur the younger branches of an involved aristocracy which clerical sinecures offer, they will not consent to give up, even though such provision can only be secured at the expense of perpetual. injustice, oppression, and bloodshed. The motion of Lord JOHN RUSSELL has exhibited to the country the utter worthlessness of the Tory professions of Reform. On this account, then, as well as on others, it has been of signal service to the Liberal cause.
In a debate of four nights, there were of course some dull speeches delivered; but on the whole the question was argued with spirit and ability. The Tories laboured hard to prove that the motion was ill-timed : and so it unquestionably was—for them. Had it been delayed till after the Supplies had been voted and the Mutiny Bill, passed, it is safe to assert that the debate would have been broken off by a prorogation, before any division. could have been come to; and that would have suited the Tory Ministers extremely well. But it was argued that the details of the Church income were not before the house: they were not, but there was no occasion for details to enable the House to de- cide on the principle; and it was the extremity of assurance in the Ministerial speakers to urge this objection, while almost in the.same breath they one and all avowed that they had made up their minds on the principle of the inviolability of Church property. Last year, said the Tories, the House abstained from legislating on this subject, because the Report of the Commission- ers was not ready—why not treat us with the same forbearance ? Because, said the triumphant Liberals, we trusted to the profes- sions of the late Ministry that they were favourable to our prin- ciples, and would act upon them; but we have no confidence in you : besides, you have a Tithe Bill before the House, which you acknowledge cannot be passed till this question is settled, though it ought to pass without delay; and yet you complain that we press the discussion of this question upon the House! In this way were the Ministerial orators answered throughout the debate. Of the speakers on the Tory side, the most.distingnished were Sir ROBERT PEEL, Lord STANLEY, Sir JssucS..GRATIAM, and Sir t. WILLIAM FOLLETT. Sir ROBERT was, S ilSUal, dextrous and careful ; by turns supple and overbearin —nowtrying to wheedle Lord JOHN RUSSELL into a postponem of his resolution, then- tareatening him with the indignation of-the 'Country if he sisted,--for avail FEEL, when he thinks ktuits his purposi ZZ, not disdain to invoke the " pressure from without," and appeal from the Legislature to the voice of the People. Circumstanced as he is however, in regard to public opinion, the reference to it was ludicrous. The capital defect in all Sir ROBERT PEEL'S ora- torical displays on great party questions, was more visible than it is commonly, in the speech of Thursday night : his insincerity— his acting of a part to answer a temporary purpose—was offen- sively transparent; his anxiety made him overact the part. He ban accomplished political charlatan; but the public has become accustomed to his tricks, and notwithstanding his adroitness, there is danger that his " occupation " will not long endure.
Lord STANLEY'S speech was only remarkable for the hardihood with which he avowed the extreme opinions of the High Church karty : he went considerably beyond Sir ROBERT PEEL, or even 1111 r. LEFROY, Sit JAMES GRAHAM had a number of scattered points and some personalities cleverly put, which told well in the House : but the solemn declaration of religious motives with which be closed his defence of the most monstrous religious abuse the Christian world has witnessed, was absolutely disgust- ing—it was, besides, a superlative specimen of the bathos. Sir WILLIAM Foteerr, the Solicitor General, sustained his high forensic reputation, in a well-prepared harangue. There was not much matter in his speech, and no novelty ; but it was admirably delivered, with a continuous flow of words, and an earnestness of manner that made every point effective. He somewhat resembles Sir ROBERT PEEL in the plausible, but is free from the histrionic vulgarity and strutting seltimportance which mark the Premier.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL, SIC JOHN HOBHOUSE, Mr. SPRING RICE, Mr. Sergeant WI LOB, Mr. FOWELL BUXTON, and Mr. O'CONNELL, were the most effective Opposition orators. Mr. WARD contributed some excellent matter, and placed the general principle on very high ground; but in the arrangement and delivery of his speech be fell somewhat short of his usual success. Lord JOHN RUSSELL was sensible and conciliatory : he possesses many all-important qualificotions for his post as leader, but it is to be wished that be threw rather more animation into his speeches. His reply to Sir ROBERT PEEL, however, was sufficiently spirited, and evinced the readiness of the practised debater. Sir Jots HOBHOUSE threw his points and sarcasms among the Treasury gentlemen like so many squibs or rockets, startling and galling them on every side. Mr. SPRING RICE supplied a very well got up and effective argument; which served as a reason, or at least an excuse, to the most devoted admirers of bygone days and legislation for supporting the motion. Sergeant WiLDE proved himself a formi- dable antagonist to the Tories, by a massy and argumentative speech ; and Mr. Foweee BUXTON made a deep impression on the House by his religious view of the subject. Nothing could be more different from Sir JAMES GRAHAM'S ostentatious exhibi- tion of piety, than Mr. BUXTON'S simple, earliest, and rational appeal to the real friends of the Church. O'CONNELL left all the other speakers far behind in the display of the higher order of oratorical power. He throws off with perfect ease, almost with carelessness, ideas and arguments, which it costs other Members rains and labour to arrange and deliver. He touches one sub- ject after another in his discursive range—serious, pathetic, and humorous, by turns—just, it would seem, as whim or caprice dictated. But the effect of this is powerful. Can it be really the spontaneous overflowing of a vigorous intellect and prolific imagina- tion; or is it the result of study—t he art of the consummate orator There were some deserters to the Tory camp; and among these were gentlemen professing to be pious above their fellows: we only wish they were honest—these pledge-breaking supporters of the abominations of the Irish Church. Mr. POWELL BUXTON'S speech took away all excuse from the truly religious for opposing the motion. Henceforward we never can regard the persons we allude to as sincere in their politics, their religion, or any thing else.
